The Prizblog

In his post-election analysis, Tom Mountain, columnist for the Newton TAB, asserts that Setti Warren’s narrow victory over State Representative Ruth Balser in the November 3 general election could be attributed to a relatively small, but loyal, band of social conservatives who were urged to vote for Warren at Mountain’s behest. 

It’s an interesting theory, and a fascinating political story, because it’s wrought with intrigue.  Mountain, who was a candidate for School Committee in Ward 8, was running against Margie Ross Decter, who is nearly universally liked and respected in Newton.  Anti-Establishment forces, led by Emily Norton and the Political Action Committee to Elect Great School Committee Members seeking to wrest control of the school committee from the dreaded Establishment, put together a slate of candidates, publicizing their slate days before the election.  The slate included the school committee “Challengers,” Margaret Albright (Ward 2), Dan Proskauer (Ward 4), Steve Seigel (Ward 5), Olivia Mathews (Ward 6), Matt Hills (Ward 7), and Decter in Ward 8.  Decter… over Mountain.

Mountain, upset that his oft-political allies in the PAC inexplicably chose Decter over him in their slate, allegedly sent out an e-mail to approximately 1,000 conservative supporters asking them to support Setti Warren, knowing that most in the PAC had come out for Ruth Balser.

24 hours later, Setti Warren beat Ruth Balser by 463 votes.  According to Mountain, his e-mail to the 1,000 conservatives-in-the-wood-work put Warren over the top.  Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

But did Moutain’s e-mail really secure Warren’s victory?  The truth is, we’ll never know.  We don’t have exit polls in local elections, so we don’t have hard data to prove or deny that theory.  All we have, in the words of Mr. Spock, is a theory that happens to fit the facts.

Are there, as Mountain suggests, legions of social conservatives in Newton who will sway an election one way or the other at their whim?  I took a look at the federal and state election results of the past few years to get some answers.

Not surprisingly, in both the 2004 and 2008 Presidential elections, Newton voted Democrat by approximately a 3-1 margin.  In both elections, of Newton’s 32 precincts, not a single precinct was won by the Republican ticket.  In both 2004 and 2008, the largest margin of victory between Democrats and Republicans came in Ward 6-3 (1,157 votes in 2008, 1,064 votes in 2004).  By that measure, you might say Ward 6-3 is Newton’s most liberal precinct.

Where, then, by the same measure is Newton’s most conservative precinct?  That would be Ward 1, Precinct 4.  Better known in Newton as Nonantum, or to its friends, The Lake. 

In 2004, Ward 1-4 voted for Kerry/Edwards over Bush/Cheney, 691 to 375, by a margin of 316 votes, or 65% to 35%.  In 2008, Obama/Biden beat McCain/Palin, 668 to 411, by a margin of 257, or 62% to 38%.  Now, call me a divia mush, but that’s not exactly what I would call “conservative.”  What I would call that is “the rest of the country.”  It just seems conservative when you hold it up to the rest of Newton.

Just for kicks, let’s look at the 2006 Massachusetts gubernatorial statistics.  In ward 6, precinct 3, Patrick/Murray beat Healey/Hillman, 1000 to 85.  In ward 1, precinct 4, Patrick/Murray beat Healey/Hillman 380 to 279.  99 votes!  Again, not “conservative”… but not moon-bat liberal, either.

If Mountain’s theory holds true, and “conservatives” put Warren over the top, you would think you would see The Lake break heavy for Setti Warren.  Did it?

Not at all.

Warren and Balser nearly split the vote in Ward 1-4, with Warren taking it 226 to 200.  Ward 1, Precinct 1, with largely similar statistics to 1-4, held similarly, with Warren eeking by Balser 289 to 234.   Ward 6, precinct 3, our famously liberal precinct, also came in close, with Ruth beating Setti 480 to 398.

In fact, liberal and conservative ideology appears to have played little, if any, role in the municipal election, as far as we can tell from the election results.  After all, it’s a local election, and there is nothing inherently conservative or liberal about a pothole, as we’ve noted before.  As such, it seems that Tom Mountain’s theory is an interesting one, but remains just a theory.

——————————————–

If Tom was off with regard to legions of conservatives putting Setti Warren into office, he might be onto something if we substituted our local political spectrum for his traditional conservative orthodoxy.  

After all, the Lake was the only neighborhood in the city that Tom Mountain actually won.  He beat Margie Ross Decter 186 to 143.  In fact, Ward 1-4 was the only precinct in the entire city where the all of the school committee challengers won.  Ladies and gentlemen, we have located the capital of Angry Newton, and it is The Lake.

Now, lest you accuse me of slighting The Lake by saying the people there are “angry” (I see you over there. Step away from the keyboard), I’m not.  For whatever reason, folks in The Lake feel marginalized – according to election results, anyway.  While they were the only precinct, of 32, to vote for every single challenger, this isn’t the first time they’ve shown Anti-Establishment tendencies in local elections.

In 2007, they voted heavily in favor of Alderman (then “challenger”) Greer Tan Swiston, who beat hardcore Traditionalist Leslie Burg for one of two Ward 3 Alderman-At-Large seats.  That same year, they also gave Tom Sheff, Geoff Epstein and Jeff Seideman their votes.  In 2005, Mike Striar saw his biggest precinct wins in Ward 1.  In 2007, the Newton North Site Plan referendum went over like a lead balloon in The Lake, earning defeat in Wards 1-1 and 1-4 by a combined total of 338 to 230.

And, of course, last year’s override proposal was whooped by a Belichick-era score of 445 to 86 in Ward 1-4.

What does all this mean?  Well, for starters I think it means that Mayor-Elect Setti Warren’s agenda is more tied to The Lake than anyone realizes.  If building a plan to move forward out of the financial mess that Newton finds itself in requires any type of community-wide consensus, that consensus is going to be hardest to reach between Ward 1 and the rest of the city. 

And I totally sympathize with that neighborhood.  It’s just different than the rest of the city.  They’re disenfranchised.  They’ve got one great alderman, one octogenarian, and another who can’t make meetings on time.  No offense.  They clearly weren’t on board with the Cohen administration, and any time you have a neighborhood that’s this much of an outlier, it can cause problems.  For the whole city. 

The recent election results from Ward 1 were good for Setti Warren in at least one way:  The Lake seems ambivalent toward him.  And judging from past mayoral election results over there, that’s probably a pretty good starting point.